I made it to the Fancy Foods Show here in San Francisco yesterday where I saw numerous displays of various waters labeled “healthy” (“No sugar!”) and flavored with everything from cucumbers to various herbs and touted for their alleged environmental responsibility.

What I didn’t see, in any example, was how any of these bottled waters were better than – oh, I don’t know – a plain old glass of water.

I have a question in regard to this statement from the article: “Coke came under fire in December by the FDA, which said claims Diet Coke Plus includes a variety of vitamins and minerals violate U.S. policy against marketing soda and other snack foods as more nutritious.”

When a soda or other snack food has had vitamins and minerals added to it, isn’t it actually more nutritious (assuming actual absorption of the stuff)? Why does such a law exist except to babysit the confused populous? Drinking Diet Coke Plus has got to be at least a little better than drinking its alternative. I say let them market their VitaminWater less as a “health food” and more as a “healthier alternative food”.

In response to I say let them market their VitaminWater less as a “health food” and more as a “healthier alternative food”.

It is trickey for a company to use “2.5 servings” label for their bottle, who really divides a 20oz (.6L) into 2.5 servings?
Maybe the Nutrition Facts should have the number of servings per container–if the container is standarly consumed in ‘one serving’.

13g of sugar becomes 33g of sugar per common. The World Health Organization recommends consuming 50g or less per day of added sugars. 66% of sugar in water. With a spinkling of vitamins. This doesn’t sound much different than a sugary soda.
Why not just have some 100% juice, a real food? That’s what I use for a sports drink!